Originally posted by Saint
<snip>
As a Psychologist myself I'd be very interested to hear the hypotheses for your research. However
I'm intrigued as to how you plan to collect data from a series of non-standard responses - is this
qualitative research?
Saint
O.K. - Thank you all for your valid criticims. Some of the info you wanted:-
I am currently in the second half of my Msc in Environmental Psychology at Guildford University. I love cycling, both as a pass time and as a means for transport. I have never used a forum before, which may go some way to explaining my lapse in etiquette.
The research is qualitative in nature and uses a multiple sort procedure which enables the exploration of the way people structure their perceptions around a particular subject. There are usually 15-20 cards, each of which contains an element or facet of the subject area in question. The respondent sorts these cards into mutually exclusive groups to demonstrate their perceptions of the area in question. The questions I posted were not so much for data gathering, more for formulating the elements or facets to go on the cards. As such they were supposed to be open ended to facilitate conversation and opinion. For those of you who want to know more on the theory and method there is a more detailed explanation below. For those of you who weren't bothered anyway sorry for the over-kill!
THEORY OVERVIEW
It is now accepted that mediators of car use involve more than just rationalised, functional motives and include both symbolic and affective motives such as feelings of control, independence, power and prestige. (Jensen, 1999; Steg, Vlek & Slotgraaf, 2001; Stradling, Meadows & Beatty, 2001; Wright & Egan, 2000). However, similar advances in understanding have not been made with “greener” alternatives to the car such as the bicycle. In contrast to cars, the current understanding of people’s choice of bicycles as a means of transport is limited to the practical issues involved (e.g. facilities, convenience and personal cost), and attitudes towards cycling. Such explanations emphasise the practical and rational motives of cycle use and assume the goal directed nature of transport mode choice. Although this approach has been fruitful and has gleaned many ways that the extent of cycle use can be increased by the provision of facilities, removal of psychological barriers and projects for attitude change, it says little about the social and psychological motives of cycle use.
In their study into the relative importance of different types of motives in car use, Steg, Vlek & Slotgraaf (2001) draw attention to the distinction between instrumental-reasoned and the symbolic-affective motives. Instrumental-reasoned motives refer to the practical or functional qualities of the car, and how people reason that those qualities are adept at fulfilling their transport needs. Symbolic-affective motives refer to the aspects of the car that fulfil social and psychological functions. The symbolic aspect of their symbolic-affective dimension reflects the expressive and comparative nature of attached meanings and places them firmly in a social context. For example, different styles and classes of cars facilitate social comparison and expression of identity. The affective aspect refers to the emotions that can be evoked through the experience of travelling in a car. Examples of this may be emotions associated with driving in a particular manner, or feelings of independence and freedom elicited by the ability to go wherever and whenever you want.
There are a number of factors involved in bicycle use that suggests that symbolic motives may also play a part for individuals who cycle. For example, bicycles tend to be privately owned; are subject to personal control; and are available in a number of different styles. It therefore seems reasonable to speculate that symbolic motives may act in a similar fashion in cycling as they do in driving. The occurrence of fads and fashions in the bicycle industry also suggests an opportunity for social comparison in terms of the “the latest thing”. Each decade over the past thirty years has had at least one fashionable bike type. The “Chopper” in the Seventies; The Grifter, BMX, and foldable bike in the Eighties; and the various types of Mountain Bikes and “Hybrids” in the Nineties and early 2000’s. The development in the design of bicycle components such as suspension, gears, and disk brakes is faster paced than these broader changes in fads and may also provide a basis for social comparison for those who are more dedicated cyclists.
The fact that bicycles are an environmentally friendly form of transport may also impact on the social identity of cyclists through the symbolic meanings attributed to their transport mode of choice. In addition, individuals who cycle may also see themselves, or be seen, as ‘fitness fanatics’ or ‘sporty’ because they are propelled under their own power. Again, these examples are comparable to research of the motives of car use that suggest that factors such as prestige are important.
There is also reason to believe that affect may play a part in the motives behind cycling. An example of a possible affective motive of cycle use comes from Jackson and Ruehr (1998) who conducted a survey to ascertain bicycle use and attitudes towards cycling in San Dieago County, U.S.A. They found that 58% of the respondents, who said they cycled, did so for recreation or exercise, but only 15% cycled for transportation purposes. This suggests that cycling is intrinsically rewarding as well as performing a practical role. It is probable that the incidence of recreational cycling is to some extent dependent upon facilities provided and the perceived environmental quality of the cyclists’ surroundings. However, many studies have found that exercise is associated with the mood enhancement in non-clinical as well as clinical groups (Litchman & Poser, 1981; Yeung and Hemsley, 1999), even after a short duration (Yeung, 1996) suggesting that the benefits of cycling can also be experienced independently of the environment.
Despite the above observations and research findings, it is not clear to what extent these concerns play a role in the motives behind bicycle use. There is clearly a need to understand phenomena in bicycle use that not only account of its practical roles, but also the associated motives which may be analogous to Steg et al’s symbolic-affective motives. Due to the scarcity of research exploring the motives of people who cycle, and the occurrence of phenomena associated with cycling that suggest a broader understanding is required, it is the main aim of the proposed research to explore the motives behind bicycle use. Therefore, the central questions in the proposed research are: 1) Are cyclists motivated by symbolic-affective meanings in addition to instrumental-reasoned motives? 2) What is the relative importance of instrumental-reasoned and symbolic-affective motives behind bicycle use?
With respect to the project remit, it is also important to identify any disparities in the way cyclists and car drivers think about the transport modes in question. This will further aid interventions designed to remove real or perceived barriers to bicycle use and inform car reduction campaigns. Therefore it is necessary to ask: 1) What are the motives behind car use for this comparative sample? 2) What is the relative importance of instrumental-reasoned and symbolic-affective motives behind car use?
It is probable that there is a considerable overlap in the awareness of motives for using particular transport modes. For example, it is widely accepted that British culture is, in many respects, dominated by the car (Root; 1996). It is not necessary to be a car driver to have a detailed knowledge about the motives of car use, one just has to watch a car advertisement to observe these. Furthermore, few cyclists have not travelled in a car as a passenger and experienced, at least vicariously, the instrumental-reasoned and symbolic-affective motives behind car use. The bicycle, although rarely a passenger barer and generally advertised in specialist magazines, also has meanings attributed to it that can be traced back to vicarious experience or public discourse. An example of this ‘common knowledge’ might be that bicycles are an environmentally friendly or health promoting form of transport.
Despite these likely over-laps between cyclists and drivers in their perceptions of each group’s transport modes, the case still remains that there should be an observable difference between the two groups. In short, if the transport mode of choice does reflect the ability of different aspects of vehicle uses and its attributes to fulfil personal needs and desires, a difference between car drivers and cyclists’ perceptions of the transport modes in question should exist. For example, Fuji, Garling & Kitamura (2001) found that drivers’ perceptions about public transport became more accurate after a freeway closure forced them to commute by public transport. This demonstrates the importance that experience plays in the perception of a transport mode. Further, research into the reduction of car use suggests that cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957; Cooper & Fazio, 1984) may play a role in the number or nature of motives identified by cyclists and drivers for the two transport mode types. For example, Steg and Vlek (1996) found that when specific attitudes towards car use were in question with respondents who were previously found to be environmentally aware, participants’ became less cognisant of the associated problems of car use. This suggests that cyclists may identify more negative consequences associated with car use than car drivers.
Therefore second aim of the proposed research is to investigate how cyclists and car drivers think about each others’ mode of transport as well as their own. There are two research questions concerning this aim: 1) How do drivers’ and cyclists’ perceptions differ on cars? 2) How do drivers’ and cyclists’ perceptions differ on bicycles?
METHODOLOGY
PROCEDURE
Previous research suggests that transport mode users tend to rationalise and justify their travel behaviour. Steg et al. (2001) argue that instrumental-reasoned motives are more readily offered by respondents than symbolic-affective motives in self-report situations for this very reason. Steg et al. found that more intuitive data gathering methods do not cause respondents to rationalise their behaviour and elicit symbolic-affective motives as well as instrumental-reasoned motives. The multiple sort procedure (MSP) has therefore been chosen as it is entails an intuitive task and therefore provides the best opportunity for exploring all the motive types in transport mode use.
Participants will be presented with fifteen to twenty picture cards displaying elements relating to the use of the transport mode in question. A separate set will be used for bicycles and cars to facilitate the coherence of what is being represented and distinction between the two transport modes when required. Each participant will be asked to conduct two sets of sorts; one set on the mode of transport that they use, and one set on the mode of transport that they do not. The order of sort sets will be counterbalanced within each group to avoid fatigue and practice effects. Participants will be asked to conduct free sorts on what they think about cars/bicycles until sorts are exhausted. Structured sorts will also be used in order to cyclists and drivers perceptions on the motives of car and bicycle use
MATERIALS
The elements represented upon the cards for both bicycles and cars will be drawn from previous research on the motives of car use on the practical functions of, and attitudes towards each transport mode. Public discourse from Internet sites tailored for cyclists will also be used to select elements with the aim of compensating for the lack of previous research on the motives of bicycle use. This literature search method of element selection was chosen as interview or questionnaire techniques have been found by Steg et al. to be biased towards eliciting rationalised responses and therefore provide mainly instrumental motives. In order to select card elements from this literature search, Steg et al’s (2001) study using a similar sort technique for the research of motives behind car use will be used as a guide for compatibility. Where possible, bicycle sort cards and car sort cards will be as comparable as possible in subject matter. For example, where previous findings from research into motives behind car use suggest that aggressive cyclists are an important factor, aggressive drivers would be used for cyclists. As the respondents perceptions of the cards themselves are as important as the way they sort them, it is not necessary (or indeed possible) to have strictly comparable card items for each sort set. The pictorial representations on the cards will be computer generated silhouette pictures, similar in style to road signs, unless manipulation is required to illustrate certain elements (see appendix one). This is done to avoid any confounding from preference of colour, or background detail that may be found in photographs. The cards will be validated for coherence of meaning at local bicycle and car retailers.
Some do, some don't.
